SillyDog701

[Fulvio]

Just to make my statement clear, and it must have not been. I created the links in Firefox (incorrectly), and I had Seamonkey open at the same time. From Seamonkey, I corrected the links, and they looked the same in both browsers. In Seamonkey, I corrected the two links, one for each of the two figures, i.e. one with many blanks, and the other with a bunch of images, and each link looked identical in Firefox and Seamonkey, i.e. the one without images vs. with images. To me, at least, it means that there is no difference with either browser. Got it?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:2.0b10) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/4.0b10

[richard mitnick]

Fulvio-

Thank you, but no. I can not get the real images to show up in SM. That is my problems. They gray boxes are useless.

Maybe there is something in about:config? I have looked, but could not find any likely candidates to alter.

>>RSM

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13 ImageShackToolbar/5.2.4 ( .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET4.0C)

[Fulvio]

Fulvio-

Yes, your two images are the correct images, the SM page is full of blanks, and the FF page has the actual images.
>>RSM

Except that both look the same in Firefox and Seamonkey, for me, at least. But, who knows? I was trying to create the links, from the information which you provided, and not try to show the same page in two different programs.

(Go Steelers)

Went! I could not help it. I was 50:50 Packers/Steelers, so I could not help picking the winning team.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13

[Amrad]

Hello Fulvio,

Just to make my statement clear, and it must have not been. I created the links in Firefox (incorrectly), and I had Seamonkey open at the same time. From Seamonkey, I corrected the links, and they looked the same in both browsers. In Seamonkey, I corrected the two links, one for each of the two figures, i.e. one with many blanks, and the other with a bunch of images, and each link looked identical in Firefox and Seamonkey, i.e. the one without images vs. with images. To me, at least, it means that there is no difference with either browser. Got it?

Were you comparing the two screen captures on Imageshack, one with images and one with grey squares, first in SeaMonkey and then in Firefox, or the other way round, if that's how you did it? If so, what you should have been doing is comparing in SM and FF the source of those screen captures, not the screen captures themselves!

So, if you go to Google, select Images from the top left of the screen and search for compact muon solenoid in both SM and FF, what do you see? If, however, you were doing that, my apologies, but it did seem to me that you might not have been doing what Richard did when he got different results in FF compared to SM!

I can see the images in SM 2.0.12, so it appears to be specific to Richard's installation, I don't have FF installed, so I can't check with that.

Regards,

Dave.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.17) Gecko/20110123 SeaMonkey/2.0.12 Like Firefox/3.6

[Fulvio]

Dave,
you were correct in your interpretation that I was comparing the screen capture. But I did what you suggested, i.e. selected Images(left column of an open Search, or Images of a new search) in a Google Search, and typed

compact muon solenoid

in the Search box, I got the same Images in both Firefox 3.6.3 and Seamonkey 2.0.11. I don't know which setting may cause these differences, and I get no gray boxes.
And, I use the real Seamonkey 2.0.11, and not some other SM 2.0.12 like FF3.6, which you are showing.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101123 SeaMonkey/2.0.11

[richard mitnick]

So, I tried going to Google images first and then searching on compact muon solenoid, I still got the gray boxes. But you guys got the images.

In SM Preferences I accept all images.

But, clearly, if you guys are seeing the images, it is something in my configuration.

Any suggestions beyond Accept all images? Maybe something in about:config?

>>RSM

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13 ImageShackToolbar/5.2.4 ( .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET4.0C)

[richard mitnick]

O.K., I tried a new profile and that worked. So, it is something in the profile, but, how do I find what? To redo profiles on the four machines that I use for my blogs is endless work.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101123 SeaMonkey/2.0.11

[Amrad]

Hello Fulvio,

Dave,
you were correct in your interpretation that I was comparing the screen capture.

Ah, I was right then.

But I did what you suggested, i.e. selected Images(left column of an open Search, or Images of a new search) in a Google Search, and typed

compact muon solenoid

in the Search box, I got the same Images in both Firefox 3.6.3 and Seamonkey 2.0.11. I don't know which setting may cause these differences, and I get no gray boxes.

OK, neither do I, and Richard has found that the problem is with his profile, not SeaMonkey itself.

And, I use the real Seamonkey 2.0.11, and not some other SM 2.0.12 like FF3.6, which you are showing.

The SeaMonkey 2.0.12 that I use is as real as the one you use ! The only difference is that I have appended "Like Firefox/3.6" to the User Agent string, so I can access web sites that would otherwise not work properly - my on-line banking, for example - it's called "User Agent" spoofing.

Regards,

Dave

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.17) Gecko/20110123 SeaMonkey/2.0.12 Like Firefox/3.6

[Fulvio]

it's called "User Agent" spoofing.

I know what spoofing is. Typically, sites look for the User Agent, and if they don't like what they see, they will prevent rendering. This is, often, the case with Seamonkey, and it is the only reason why I prefer Firefox. If you change the User Agent, you appear to be using another browser.
But, I can get the same pictures in Seamonkey and Firefox, without any User Agent modification. That was my message, no more no less.

As for my version of Seamonkey, I do Help|Check for updates, and I got, yesterday, after seeing your message, that I have the latest version. I did a search for "Seamonkey, and I got a page which says that 2.0.11 is to be downloaded. When I did a search for 2.0.12, there was an extensive Changelog, but no link to download it. When I clicked on the download etc on the left side, I got back to the same page which said that 2.0.11 is to be downloaded. I believe you when you say that 2.0.12 is real, but I get nowhere at the Seamonkey site.
And, in the page which I found, I saw that 2.0.12 is in beta testing.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13

[richard mitnick]

So, here is a conundrum about my Google problem. I do my blog work on four machines. On three of them I had the problem and solved it with a new profile, which I tested. But on the fourth machine, no problem!!

We tend to commit the same sins for one machine to the next. Try as I might, I cannot see any difference in add-ons, prefs, themes, etc.

>>RSM

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13 ImageShackToolbar/5.2.4 ( .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET4.0C)

[Amrad]

Hello Fulvio,

it's called "User Agent" spoofing.

I know what spoofing is.

Fair enough. I got the impression from your post that maybe you didn't.

If you change the User Agent, you appear to be using another browser.

True enough but how else is one supposed to view sites that don't cater for SeaMonkey? I shouldn't have to install another browser just for such sites, anyway, I can always use IE for that,as it comes with Windows by default.

But, I can get the same pictures in Seamonkey and Firefox, without any User Agent modification. That was my message, no more no less.

Again, the impression I got was that you thought I wasn't using a 'genuine' SeaMonkey. I was merely pointing out that, regardless of what the User Agent string says, it is! I can also get the pictures in SM without any User Agent spoofing, it just happened to be that way when I posted on here.

As for my version of Seamonkey, I do Help|Check for updates, and I got, yesterday, after seeing your message, that I have the latest version. I did a search for "Seamonkey, and I got a page which says that 2.0.11 is to be downloaded. When I did a search for 2.0.12, there was an extensive Changelog, but no link to download it. When I clicked on the download etc on the left side, I got back to the same page which said that 2.0.11 is to be downloaded. I believe you when you say that 2.0.12 is real, but I get nowhere at the Seamonkey site.
And, in the page which I found, I saw that 2.0.12 is in beta testing.

Yes, you are quite correct, SM 2.0.12 is a release candidate, if you are interested in downloading it, you can find it here:

SeaMonkey 2.0.12 (US-English)
SeaMonkey 2.0.12 (GB-English)

Regards,

Dave.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.17) Gecko/20110123 SeaMonkey/2.0.12 Like Firefox/3.6

[Fulvio]

Thanks, but I was able to download Seamonkey 2.1 beta1. It is different enough from the 2.0.x types that I decided to give it a whirl. I installed it in a separate folder, and I am using it with a profile of its own.
I like it, although I had to do a lot to make it work to my satisfaction, but again, nice images. I have clue why Seamonkey would act up. But, I will have to see what happens when I check it in Win98SE with SM1.x. I don't believe that it is possible to use SM2.x in Win98SE.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:2.0b7pre) Gecko/20101008 Firefox/4.0b7pre SeaMonkey/2.1b1

[Amrad]

Hello Fulvio,

Thanks,...

You're welcome.

...but I was able to download Seamonkey 2.1 beta1.

OK. I also have that but I decided to stick with 2.0.x for now.

Regards,

Dave.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.17) Gecko/20110123 SeaMonkey/2.0.12 Like Firefox/3.6

[Fulvio]

I am, also, sticking with my 2.0.11. I did not think that getting 2.0.12 would be interesting.
Now, I am testing, with 1.1.19 in Win98SE, and, all images are avaiilable.
Conclusion: Images are the same using two computers, with different OS, and one SM 1.x, and 2.o.x and 2.1

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100228 SeaMonkey/1.1.19